President Bush Betrays His Friend, The Facts, and Free Enterprise,

By David A. Noebel

“Et tu, Brute?” Caesar utters these words as he is being stabbed to death and recognizing his friend Brutus among the assassins. The most famous three words in literature (Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, III, 1, 77) streak down through the centuries as the ultimate betrayal by one’s closest friend.

            These words of betrayal popped into my head the moment I read that the president of the United States had stabbed his long-time friend and fellow Republican Senator James M. Inhofe right in the softest part of his abdomen. It didn’t kill him, but the damage is done.

            Senator Inhofe (Oklahoma) has been a loyal Republican, but instead of extolling him in his attempt to expose Democrat Al Gore and his wild-eyed “global warming” scheme (now called “climate change” since the earth hasn’t been warming since 1998), George W. Bush decided to throw his lot in with the Gores of the world and other leftwing, socialistic, international elitists and paint Inhofe as a buffoon or social dinosaur.  As the Washington Times editorial put it, Bush was “kicking the intellectual legs out from under a defensible  conservative position on climate change” (April 17, 2008). 

            Listen to Senator Inhofe, and then tell me the president of the United States shouldn’t be in his corner: “The American people are fed up with the media for promoting the idea that former Vice President Al Gore represents the scientific ‘consensus’ that SUV’s and the modern American way of life have somehow created a ‘climate emergency’ that only United Nations bureaucrats and wealthy Hollywood liberals can solve.”

            Isn’t this exactly the situation we find ourselves in? 

            Listen to Christopher Booker, writing in the London Sunday Telegraph (April 20, 2008): “As President Bush finally caved in to international pressure last week and committed the US to spending untold billions of dollars on ‘the fight against global warming,’ I happened to be in Washington at the same time, talking on the same subject to more than a dozen very lively and opinionated radio shows.  I was there with my co-author Richard North, at the invitation of an enterprising Washington think-tank, the Independent Women’s Forum, to launch our book Scared to Death.” 

            Booker says the highlight of his trip was meeting Dr. S. Fred Singer, who has taken on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their hysterical reporting over the years.  Singer recently organized a scientific conference in New York on the subject of global warming. The conferences materials can be obtained by googling “sepp” and “NIPCC.”

            According to Booker, the NIPCC report’s most startling passage, however, “is one that examines the ‘fingerprint’ of warming at different levels of the atmosphere which the computer models come up with as proof that the warming is manmade. The pattern actually shown by balloon and satellite records is so dramatically different that, even on the IPCC’s own evidence, the report concludes, ‘anthropogenic [manmade] greenhouse gases can contribute only in a minor way to the current warming, which is mainly of natural origin.’”

            The significance of this, says Booker, “can scarcely be overestimated.  At just the moment when, thanks to the overwhelming pressure generated by the IPCC, the world’s politicians, led by the [socialistic] EU, are committing us to spending untold trillions of pounds, dollars and euros on measures to ‘mitigate’ the claimed effects of manmade warming, here is a galaxy of experts producing hard evidence that—if the problem exists at all—the official explanation for it is oriented in wholly the wrong direction.  Furthermore, the consequences of that warming and of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have, on balance, been wholly beneficial, by increasing plant growth.”

            Even the pope seems to have it right. Pope Benedict XVI, according to Simon Caldwell, “has launched a surprise attack on climate change prophets of doom, warning them that any solutions to global warming must be based on firm evidence and not on dubious ideology [spelled Al Gore].  The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.” The German-born Pontiff said “it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.” Why couldn’t President Bush have said something rational and conservative like this instead of jumping with both feet into the Gore camp along with all his international, socialistic brethren?

            In case you think I am stretching the facts, please listen to Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist teaching at the University of Oklahoma in the Arts and Sciences Department, as he speaks up for and defends his senator, James M. Inhofe.

            In a report to the U. S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (epw.senate.gov), Dr. Deming said this: “Around 1996, I became aware of how corrupt and ideologically driven current climate research can be.  A major researcher working in the area of climate change confided in me that the factual record needed to be altered so that people would become alarmed over global warming.  He said, ‘We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.’

            “The Medieval Warm Period was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the ‘Little Ice Age’ took hold in the 14^th and 15^th centuries.  The warmed climate of the Medieval Warm Period was accompanied by a remarkable flowering of prosperity, knowledge, and art in Europe.  But the existence of the Medieval Warm Period was an ‘inconvenient truth’ for true believers in global warming.  It needed to be erased from history so that people could become convinced that present day temperatures were truly anomalous.  Unfortunately, the prostitution of science to environmental ideology is all too common.”

            Instead of knifing Senator Inhofe, Dr. Deming praised him, saying, “Sen. James Inhofe is not only correct in his view on global warming, but courageous to insist on truth, objectivity, and sound science.  Truth in science doesn’t depend on human consensus or political correctness.  The fact that the majority of journalists and pundits bray like sheep is meaningless.  Galileo, another ‘social dinosaur,’ said ‘the crowd of fools who know nothing is infinite.’”

            Why couldn’t President Bush eulogize his fellow Republican instead of making headlines in the Washington Times with “Bush prepares global warming initiative.”

            Tony Blankley, a longtime Bush supporter, can hardly believe the news.  “Oh dear,” he says. “Just as an increasing number of scientists are finding their courage to speak out against the global warming alarmists, and just as a building body of evidence and theories challenge the key elements of the human-centric carbon-based global warming theories—President Bush takes this moment to say in effect: ‘We are all global alarmists now.’”

            Quoting Chris Horner, the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming, Blankley notes how the Democrats desperately want Bush and the Republicans to “take ownership of the global alarmists” issues before he leaves office.

            Why, you ask?  Listen to Horner/Blankley:  “Whatever restraint likely to be exercised by the Democratic Party majority next year will be induced by the political fear that the Republicans would be able to say I told you so, if their policies contract the economy and put yet more people out of work.  That will give them political cover for the entire program, which, whatever it may try to do regarding ‘global warming,’ will certainly give governments and international organizations vastly more regulatory and tax control of the U.S. economy.”

            They are right on target. They continue, “Of course, the proposed carbon taxes will subtract hundreds of billions (or trillions) of dollars from productive private-sector economic activity and transfer it to ‘our friend the government’ to spend ‘beneficially’ for us all.”

            Blankley rightly concludes, “The liberal world order will not let go of their global warming assault on free economics until hell freezes over—by which point, obviously, the global warming theory will be visibly disproven.”

            President Bush needs to invite Lord Christopher Monckton to the White House for a chat.  Glenn Beck interviewed Lord Monckton (a former Margaret Thatcher policy advisor from 1982-1986 and a graduate of Churchill College, Cambridge) on March 4, 2008, and allowed him to state the following:  “What happened is that I looked at Al Gore’s movie with mounting horror and identified three dozen scientific errors in it.  So I had a weather mate of mine who takes an interest in these matters and also had the money to pay for a court case and I said I thought this film was rubbish.  Two weeks later he rang up and said he wanted to do something to fight back against this tide of unscientific freedom-destroying nonsense, which is what global warming is really all about.”

            To make a long story short Lord Monckton took the case to court because Al Gore’s unscientific movie was being required in all British public schools.  Monckton won his court case. The court decreed that if Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth is shown, then “The Great Global Swindle” must also be shown.

            Not a timid soul, Lord Monckton is also going after NASA’s James Hansen for being in bed with Al Gore both “politically and financially.”  Both stand to cash in on their alarmist gospel (someone called it “garbage in and gospel out”), and the present-day Braveheart has written to the administrator of NASA, asking for a full investigation. If he gets the brush-off, he plans to appeal to the Office of the U.S. Attorney General!

            Al Gore might think “the debate in the scientific community is over,” but he hasn’t seen anyone like Lord Monckton on this side of the Atlantic.  Lord Monckton is presently placing catchy ads in American newspapers, asking Gore to debate him in public.  As of this writing, Gore hasn’t responded. If and when he does, he needs to have W in his corner with a towel and a bucket of water.  Senator James M. Inhofe will be in Lord Monckton’s corner with crumpets and tea. Stay tuned—this could be a rematch of a Joe Louis—Max Schmeling fight.

             To close on a positive note, President Bush’s Proclamation for the May 1, 2008 National Day of Prayer is superb!

By David Noebel Email: Noebel@Summit.org Click here for bio and archived articles